RE: Fireworks ?

[Willem-Jan Markerink <w.j.markerink@xxxxx>]

On 27 Nov 99 at 1:14, Dave Buyens wrote:

>   Flash photography wouldn't seem to work with the 202 either.  Use the 202
> for interesting daytime shots.

Flash photography is a tad less problematic than fireworks....the 
flash problem can be solved with a stroboscobe....although you need a 
big one to obtain the power similar to an ordinary flash.

Fireworks is indeed a sad limitation of any swing lens camera....with 
a slit of only a few mm's creeping by on film, one will never get the 
continuous full blast on film....even a comprimise like using 
high-speed film and shorter shutter speeds won't work....it will 
result in the same boring 'static' shots as with a normal 
camera....the trail from start to end won't be visible.

I'd call this the most tantalizing problem of swing-lens cameras.

Btw fireworks: don't always stick to wide-angle and as many bursts as 
possible....my best firework shots were with 100 or even 200mm, 
covering only part of the 'bloom'....otherworldly, much different 
than what is seen by the naked eye.
Also cute, for those into IR: use Kodak Ektachrome IR without filter, 
especially in snow covered areas....the background will be blue 
(artificial lighting itself rather neutral, unlike normal film sans blue 
filter), while the fireworks still maintain a nice spread of colors, 
all in the warm range....very nice contrast, especially with a 8mm 
circular fisheye, one that lives from strong contrasts (because of the 
limited subject magnification), and covering both the entire trail 
from start to end, as well as a lot of surroundings. 
Cool fireworks....:-))

--                 
Bye,

Willem-Jan Markerink


      The desire to understand 
is sometimes far less intelligent than
     the inability to understand


<w.j.markerink@xxxxx>
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]